tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-66728801299707991482018-03-19T12:09:59.784-07:00Agent IntellectTalking out of Buridan's assJim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.comBlogger876125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-42068176654282743512018-02-28T11:08:00.000-08:002018-02-28T11:15:12.243-08:00Accommodating evilI didn't comment on this at first, but I was pretty disgusted at the way the media fawned over North Korea's cheerleaders and Kim Yo Jong at the beginning of the Olympics. I think I understand their motive: they're trying to paint North Korea as not that bad in order to minimize American public support for a war with them, and doing one's part to avoid war is not in itself a bad thing. (If I'm imputing an incorrect motive to them, I apologize.) Having said that, if you end up accommodating evil in order to avoid war, you stand a good chance of being on the "greater evil" side of things, and I think that's exactly what's happened here. I hadn't put my thoughts together on this, but then I read this tweet from a couple of weeks ago:<br /><br /><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><div dir="ltr" lang="en">What absolutely horrifies me about this is that N Korea will take these stories and show them to the people they torture to prove to than that all their hope is useless and the outside world actually loves the regime <a href="https://t.co/TyDCRyZByZ">https://t.co/TyDCRyZByZ</a></div>— PoliticalMath (@politicalmath) <a href="https://twitter.com/politicalmath/status/962731734067392513?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 11, 2018</a></blockquote><script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script> <br /><br />Yeah, that's pretty much it. People who have lived in agony for decades will have the last of their hope stolen away by Westerners pretending like their suffering isn't worth getting in a tizzy over. The media is effectively running defense for a regime that is as evil as Nazi Germany -- I don't think that's an exaggeration at all. Not long after reading that tweet, <a href="https://www.commentarymagazine.com/foreign-policy/asia/north-korea/dprk-backlash-kim-yo-jong-pence/">I found an article that expresses my concerns in more detail here</a>.<br /><br />And since we're on the subject of Nazis, one of the claims made of them and Hitler is that they were Christian. There's a lot of back-and-forth over this, but here's two articles (<a href="https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2007/11/the_nazis_and_christianity.html">here</a> and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/02/christophobic_nazism.html">here</a>), that are interesting although one-sided, arguing that the Nazis were vehemently opposed to Christianity. He brings to bear a lot of quotes from Hitler and the most prominent Nazis expressing their disdain for, and desire to destroy, Christianity. This makes sense given their hatred of Judaism, since Christianity can easily be seen as a form of Judaism. I would have liked to see quotes from similarly important Nazis expressing the opposite view and weighed them against each other, but I also would have ascribed less weight to them, since quotes from such people expressing a positive view of Christianity could more easily be explained as political pandering than quotes expressing a negative view of Christianity could be.<br /><script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-24732787452439046582018-02-27T21:50:00.000-08:002018-02-28T11:21:37.842-08:00Quote of the DayThe story of witch-hunting has two settings: a dark, medieval world ignorant of science and under the sway of religion and superstition, and a later enlightened period when reason banished superstition and men were freed from the fear of witches. We might loosely call these periods the "Dark Ages" and the "Enlightenment" respectively.<br /><br />The idea of the Dark Ages, with its flat earth and excommunicated comets, however, is mythical and reinforces the modern mind's conviction of its own tolerance and rationality. The belief that the church uncritically accepted bizarre and sensational tales about witches is equally ill-founded. The story of witch-hunting, however, relies on these stereotypes of the Dark Ages and the Enlightenment. Thus, for Lecky, witchcraft was due to a "general credulity" that declined only when "prevailing modes of religious thought" gave way to reason. However, it is not in general possible to draw the sharp distinctions between "modes of religious thought" and early science, which Lecky blithely assumes. Indeed, early modern science, far from universally rejecting witchcraft, sometimes assisted in its investigation. In England, midwives and physicians medically examined suspects for "witch marks" -- the physical signs said to be associated with witchcraft. In the Lancashire witch trials of 1633, Sir William Harvey, who had discovered the circulation of blood in 1628, led a team of doctors and midwives to provide such expert medical evidence.<br /><br />Historians have long recognized that there is something wrong with the thesis that witchcraft ended with the Renaissance and Enlightenment. As long ago as 1969 Hugh Trevor-Roper asked why, if this view is correct, the witch craze grew in particular in the two centuries that followed the Renaissance recovery of Greek ideas of reason rather than in the Dark Ages of the medieval period.<br /><br />Lecky's confidence that science would bring enlightenment and progress is viewed more critically now than it was in the nineteenth century. The violence and persecution of the modern world is on a scale that far outweighs the cruelties visited on women accused of witchcraft. The Enlightenment faith in reason no longer seems plausible. Instead, witchcraft is seen as a sign of the way people understood the world they lived in. This puts it in a more complex and concrete context of social, economic and political history: the status of women and the routes to power open to them, the conflicts and tensions of village life and the specific anxieties of poor people over the health of animals or the growth of crops. Within this setting, witchcraft is a rational, though superstitious, response to illness and catastrophe.<br /><br /><i>Props</i><br />Like our other stories, that of witch-hunting has its conventions and props. Probably the best known is the broomstick, used by witches to fly by night to their "sabbaths." This prop is almost universal in modern portrayals and together with a pointed hat is essential garb for the well-dressed witch.<br /><br />The ancient belief that witches can fly was dismissed by canon law as a folktale. Indeed, papal rulings, canon law and Inquisitorial Directories tended to reject the exotic manifestations of witchcraft as pagan superstition until Heinrich Krämer and Jakob Sprenger published their <i>Malleus Maleficarum</i>&nbsp;in about 1486. This book repeatedly appears in the story of witch-hunting on account of its bizarre and sensational content, which fits well with the stereotype of medieval religion.<br /><br />Heinrich Krämer and Jacob Sprenger, Dominican Inquisitors, believed that they had a special mission to prosecute witches. However, the local priests and the German church authorities did not agree with them and opposed their activities. They appealed directly to the new pope, Innocent VIII, who supported them by issuing a bull, <i>Summis Desiderantes</i>, against witchcraft in 1484. He also commissioned Krämer and Sprenger to write a guide for witch prosecutors. And so the <i>Malleus Maleficarum</i>&nbsp;was born.<br /><br />The orthodox story regards Krämer and Sprenger's notorious book as typical of the bigotry and cruelty of the medieval church throughout Europe. Carl Sagan describes it as a "technical manual for torturers" and implies that it was widely used by the Inquisition in "God's work" of torture and burning. Even distinguished historians refer to it as "the guide and beaconstar of the . . . Inquisition," "a handbook used at witch trials" that "codified the belief in witches for the sixteenth century, a century which witnessed their burning in every part of Europe."<br /><br />This reputation as the standard manual of the church is wholly undeserved. The <i>Malleus Maleficarum</i>&nbsp;was in fact treated with suspicion by the Inquisition and was not extensively used in witch trials. From Venice to Germany and the Netherlands, studies have shown little or no reliance on it: "Its influence and authority have been vastly exaggerated by most scholars." Moreover, its language made it "accessible only to scholars and not to many lawyers or even to the average judge."<br /><br /><i>Torture and justice</i><br />The second prop in the story of witch-hunting is the torture chamber. The popular picture of the Inquisition, from Monty Python's famous "Spanish Inquisition" sketch to films like <i>The Name of the Rose</i>, is of the fanatical and routine use of torture to force victims to confess: "The most horrendous tortures were routinely applied to every defendant, young or old, after the instruments of torture were first blessed by the priest."<br /><br />It is undoubtedly true that torture was widely used in many judicial proceedings from the fifteenth century onward, and many sickening accounts of the horrors endured by astonishingly courageous women and men survive. But when Carl Sagan writes that torture routinely proved the validity of witchcraft accusations, he is drawing on the widespread and uncritical acceptance of the story that the church, especially the Inquisition, mercilessly and indiscriminately used torture in witchcraft trials.<br /><br />Recent historical scholarship has recognized that the Inquisition compared favorably with contemporary standards of secular justice. "In contrast to the secular courts, the Inquisition was a model of moderation and due process. The Holy Office was sceptical about the validity of confession obtained by torture, and did not employ torture as a matter of course." In Protestant countries, torture was used in witchcraft trials in both Scotland and Northern Europe, although the worst excesses occurred when political intrigue was suspected. However, there "seems not to have been one single occasion where torture of a woman for suspected witchcraft was licensed" in England, despite the fact that women were commonly whipped to obtain evidence in criminal cases and torture was used for milder felonies, including burglary and assault.<br /><br />The background for the use of torture in witchcraft trials was its use in criminal proceedings generally. Some historians have argued that the use of torture grew as formal tribunals displaced trial by ordeal or combat. As courts increasingly used new standards of proof, obtaining and sifting evidence became more important. Whereas the survival, or otherwise, of a suspect subjected to trial by ordeal itself demonstrated either guilt or innocence, the newer courts required other means of testing the truth. In this context, torture became a means of rational investigation, replacing the "trial by swimming" that a suspect might face in summary village justice. Inquisitorial skepticism about the results of torture was often associated with the better organization of church proceedings and the better standard of education of its officers. For example, the moderation of the Venetian Inquisition resulted from its local strength, close accountability to Rome and the high standards of training and discipline. The lay courts often lacked these qualities and treated their suspects more severely. "Given . . . a strong Inquisition which followed the guidelines laid down for it by the Church, witchcraft prosecution was unlikely to result in mass hysteria and persecution."<br /><br /><a href="http://www.oxfordanimalethics.com/who-we-are/fellows/">Philip J. Sampson</a><br /><i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Modern-Myths-Christianity-Western-Civilization/dp/083082281X">Six Modern Myths about Christianity and Western Civilization</a></i>Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-36757185612533614292018-02-12T09:04:00.000-08:002018-02-12T09:04:13.666-08:00Amazing!Just watch these two videos. My favorite part is the top staff at 4:21 in the second one.<br /><br /><iframe allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7OYkWSW7u4k" width="560"></iframe><br /><br /><iframe allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fczH85-0BDk" width="560"></iframe>Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-41162514934765493752018-02-05T10:32:00.001-08:002018-02-05T10:32:46.279-08:00Ugh<a href="https://pjmedia.com/trending/video-muslim-driver-attempts-hit-run-jewish-father-son-belgium/">A cab driver tried to run down a Jewish boy and his father in Belgium</a>. Several years ago, an old professor of mine who's Jewish, and who had lived in Belgium before I did, told me he would be scared to live in Europe today -- "today" meaning several years ago. It's only getting worse. <a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2012/06/on-anti-semitism-in-europe.html">Here's a case I personally encountered over there about five years ago</a>.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-42815585677452831752018-01-28T10:05:00.000-08:002018-01-28T10:05:11.197-08:00Crap. Crap crap crap crap crap.<a href="http://sciphijournal.org/so-long-and-thanks-for-the-philosophy/">The Sci Phi Journal has closed up shop</a>.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-48755640365476366612018-01-23T09:49:00.000-08:002018-01-23T09:49:53.279-08:00Quote of the DayI still lived in an almost exclusive dedication to my theoretical work -- even though the decisive influences, which drove me from mathematics to philosophy as my vocation, may lie in overpowering religious experiences and complete transformations. Indeed the powerful effect of the New Testament on a 23-year-old gave rise to an impetus to discover the way to God and to a true life through a rigorous philosophical inquiry.<br /><br />. . .<br /><br />When, however, I wrote the <i>Ideas</i>&nbsp;-- in six weeks, without even a rough draft to use as a foundation, as in a trance -- read them over, and printed them right away, I humbly thanked God that I had been allowed to write this book, and could do no other than to stand by it, in spite of the many shortcomings of the work in details. And I must go on thanking him that he allows me to visualize ever new horizons of problems in the continuing unfolding of the old yet constantly growing themes, and allows me to open every new door.<br /><br /><a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/husserl/">Edmund Husserl</a><br />Letter to Arnold Metzger<br />Translated by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erazim_Koh%C3%A1k">Erazim Kohák</a><br />In <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Husserl-Shorter-Works-Edmund/dp/0268017034">Husserl: Shorter Works</a></i><br />edited by <a href="https://philpapers.org/s/Peter%20McCormick">Peter McCormick</a> and <a href="https://philpapers.org/s/Frederick%20Elliston">Frederick A. Elliston</a><br /><br /><b>Jim's comments: </b>Husserl. <a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2013/09/quote-of-day.html">Wittgenstein</a>. <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ontological-arguments/#GodOntArg">Gödel</a>. <a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2014/02/huh.html">Church</a>.&nbsp;<a href="http://www.gnusystems.ca/CSPgod.htm">Peirce</a>. How many of the great logicians after Boole were theists? I'm not sure if Gödel and Peirce were specifically Christians, and <a href="https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/george-boole-at-the-intersection-of-science-and-faith-1.2055582">Boole himself was a deeply religious Unitarian</a>. I also note that both Husserl and Wittgenstein don't really give <i>arguments </i>for why they accept Christianity. But it's still pretty interesting.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-90920881975580576012018-01-16T19:47:00.000-08:002018-01-16T19:47:34.365-08:00On not exaggerating the impact of nuclear weaponsSo in Hawaii, they accidentally sent out news that said <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2018/01/13/hawaii-residents-get-ballistic-missile-threat-messages/?utm_term=.dd1f5a6225c6">"Ballistic missile threat inbound to Hawaii. Seek immediately shelter. This is not a drill."</a> Understandably, there was pretty widespread panic. <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5277015/Hawaii-man-HEART-ATTACK-false-missile-alert.html">One man had a massive heart attack</a>. Obviously, the concern was that North Korea had sent it, so some people wanted to blame the President for it, although it seems to have been a mistake made on the state level.<br /><br />Nuclear weapons are one of those things that people just have a magical view of. Plain old radiation is another one. It's the ultimate evil, it's the end of everything, anything that gets close to it is dead or poisoned forever. I don't mean to minimize the impact of nuclear weapons, but they're just a type of large bomb with the potential to cause long-lasting injury and illness for those who survive. That's terrible enough that we don't need to exaggerate it. Considering the type of bomb North Korea could potentially use, you'd have to be relatively close to ground zero to be affected by a nuclear bomb going off. You can go over to <a href="http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/">Nukemap</a>, type in Honolulu, type in 150 kiloton yield (or scroll down to "North Korean weapon tested in 2017"), and hit detonate. The large majority of Oahu wouldn't even be touched. In fact, you should move ground zero over to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor">Pearl Harbor</a>, which is what a bomb would probably be targeting, or maybe <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Corps_Base_Hawaii">Marine Corps Base Hawaii</a> near Kaneohe. Regardless, most of the island would be untouched. Then change the location to your own home town and see how far the impact would be.<br /><br />Yes, there are significantly bigger bombs out there -- Nukemap lets you go up to the 100,000 kiloton <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba">Tsar bomba</a> the Russians tested in 1961 -- which have huge yields. And under many circumstances, a city would be hit by multiple bombs in order to increase the yield as well. But the concern now is with North Korea, and they simply don't have the capacity to do much. Again, I'm not trying to downplay it, I just want to ease people's fears. If this doesn't help, just ignore it.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-16742141236457285042018-01-14T21:12:00.000-08:002018-01-14T21:12:08.649-08:00Cool<a href="http://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-discover-lava-tubes-leading-moon-polar-ice-water">Scientists Think They've Discovered Lava Tubes Leading to The Moon's Polar Ice</a>.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-91850984661410270522018-01-12T11:22:00.001-08:002018-01-12T15:18:01.889-08:00New world musicI love the music of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton%C3%ADn_Dvo%C5%99%C3%A1k">Antonin Dvorak</a> (or Dvořák if you want to be fancy), and the piece that brought me into the fold is the famous Largo from his <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._9_(Dvo%C5%99%C3%A1k)">New World Symphony</a>.<br /><br /><iframe allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ASlch7R1Zvo" width="560"></iframe> <br /><br />I never thought much about what was "New World" about it -- if I thought about it at all I probably figured it was originally performed in the States or something. Well, I recently discovered that the haunting and simple melody the Largo begins with was meant to sound like a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiritual_(music)">Negro spiritual</a>. And not only was Dvorak successful in capturing that sound, one of his students eventually wrote lyrics to it and made it into an actual song, "Goin' Home." Of course, the "home" in question is heaven.<br /><br /><iframe allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/M9smSP1dq-A" width="560"></iframe><br /><br />I still can't believe how beautiful all of this is. It captures the yearning for heaven as good as anything I've ever heard.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-35237745771571427942018-01-09T11:21:00.000-08:002018-01-09T11:21:07.761-08:00Recent acquisitionsFor Christmas I received the best present you can give someone like me: gift cards for Powell's books. Online I bought 20 books for $40, then I went into the stores and used up the rest of the cards. It was glorious. I've also received some other books recently from various provenances.<br /><u><br /></u><u>Nonfiction</u><br />Thomas Aquinas, <i>Summa Theologica (Great Books of the Western World, vols. 19-20: Aquinas I-II).</i><br />F. Samuel Brainard,&nbsp;<i>Reality's Fugue: Reconciling Worldviews in Philosophy, Religion, and Science.</i><br />Confucius,&nbsp;<i>The Analects.</i><br />W.T. Jones,&nbsp;<i>Kant and the Nineteenth Century: A History of Western Philosophy IV.</i><br />Immanuel Kant, <i>Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics.</i><br />Maurice Mandelbaum, <i>The Problem of Historical Knowledge: An Answer to Relativism.</i><br />Ronald H. Nash,&nbsp;<i>The Gospel and the Greeks: Did the New Testament Borrow from Pagan Thought?, </i>2nd ed.<br />Friedrich Nietzsche,&nbsp;<i>Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future.</i><br />Charles S. Peirce, <i>Selected Writings (Values in a Universe of Chance).</i><br />Leslie Stevenson, <i>Seven Theories of Human Nature,</i>&nbsp;2nd ed.<br />Lee Strobel, <i>The Case for Faith: A Journalist Investigates the Toughest Objections to Christianity.</i><br />Ludwig Wittgenstein,&nbsp;<i>Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus.</i><br /><br /><u>Fiction</u><br />Brian W. Aldiss,&nbsp;<i>Helliconia Spring.</i><br />John Barnes. <i>Orbital Resonance</i>.<br />James Blish,&nbsp;<i>The Quincunx of Time.</i><br />Ray Bradbury, <i>Dandelion Wine.</i><br />Arthur C. Clarke, <i>2010: Odyssey 2.</i><br />Arthur C. Clarke, <i>2061: Odyssey 3.</i><br />Arthur C. Clarke,&nbsp;<i>Childhood's End.</i><br />Arthur C. Clarke, <i>Rendezvous with Rama.</i><br />Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen Baxter, <i>The Light of Other Days</i>.<br />Gardner Dozois, ed.,&nbsp;<i>The Year's Best Science Fiction, vol. 5.</i><br />Harry Harrison and Carol Pugner, eds., <i>A Science Fiction Reader.</i><br />Robert A. Heinlein,&nbsp;<i>Glory Road.</i><br />Robert A. Heinlein,&nbsp;<i>The Star Beast.</i><br />Elizabeth Moon,&nbsp;<i>Lunar Activity.</i><br />Larry Niven,&nbsp;<i>Rainbow Mars.</i><br />Larry Niven, <i>The Draco Tavern.</i><br />Larry Niven, <i>The Integral Trees.</i><br />Ben Orkow, <i>When Time Stood Still.</i><br />John Ringo,&nbsp;<i>Live Free or Die.</i><br />Kim Stanley Robinson,&nbsp;<i>Aurora.</i><br />J.R.R. Tolkien, <i>The Silmarillion.</i><br />J.R.R. Tolkien, <i>Book of Lost Tales, part 1.</i><br />John Twelve Hawks, <i>The Traveler.</i><br />Gene Wolfe,&nbsp;<i>There Are Doors.</i><br /><i><br /></i><u>Comments</u><br /><u><br /></u>1. First and foremost, I received Dozois's fifth volume of his <i>Year's Best SF</i>&nbsp;free from someone on a comments thread on another blog. I pointed out that I had most of the series, and she said she had one of the ones I was missing and offered to mail it to me. I am very, very thankful to her. With this, I now have volumes 3-32 and 34. Volumes 1 and 2 are collectors' items and absurdly expensive, so I don't plan on getting those. Volume 33 is recent (published in 2016, collecting stories from 2015), so I'll wait until it's cheaper.<br /><br />2. A bunch of these books were very cheap. The ones I bought for 95¢ are <i>2010, 2065, Light of Other Days, </i><i>Helliconia Spring, </i>and&nbsp;<i>The Traveler</i>. The ones I bought for $1.50 are&nbsp;<i>Quincunx of Time, Orbital Resonance,&nbsp;</i><i>Book of Lost Tales part 1, There are Doors, A Science Fiction Reader,&nbsp;</i><i>The Analects, The Case for Faith, </i>and <i>Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics</i>. Thirteen books for $16.75.<br /><br />3. I've been wanting to get a collection of Peirce's writings for a while, so I'm very happy with that purchase -- as I am with the Kant, the Wittgenstein, and the Nietzsche. I want a broadly representative library of the more important philosophical works in history. I say "library" -- right now they all fit on two shelves, two feet wide.<br /><br />4. I'm also very happy with the Aquinas: it doesn't contain all of the second and third parts of the <i>Summa</i>, but I'm happy to have it on my shelf. Until now, the only Aquinas I had was his commentary on Boethius's <i>De Trinitate</i>. This is one of a few volumes I have in the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Books_of_the_Western_World">Great Books of the Western World</a>&nbsp;series; I also have two volumes on Aristotle and one on Kant. Next, I plan to get some of the science editions, like volumes 16 (Ptolemy, Copernicus, and Kepler) and 49 (Darwin).<br /><br />5. I had the first edition of <i>The Gospel and the Greeks</i>, but it got lost in shipping when we moved back to the States a few years ago. I'm glad to have it again. Admittedly, it's written by a philosopher rather than a historian or theologian, but he really debunks the whole <a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2010/04/christ-myth-myth.html">"Christ myth myth"</a> very well, if my recollection is accurate. I got two other books that are re-purchases of books that got lost in shipping as well. First,&nbsp;<i>The Analects</i>. I toyed with Confucianism in my early-20s, although I appreciated Taoism much more at the time. I'm still fascinated by the history of Chinese philosophy. Second,&nbsp;<i>The Case for Faith </i>which is a collection of interviews with theologians, philosophers, and other assorted folks dealing with some of the most prominent objections to Christianity. I appreciate books like this because, due to my particular mindset, they played a big role for me in my early days as a Christian. Nevertheless, they sometimes end up looking like the little Dutch boy trying to prevent the flood by putting his finger in the dam.<br /><br />6. Elizabeth Moon is most known for her military science-fiction. I'm not averse to military sci-fi per se (witness my purchase of <i>Live Free or Die</i>), but none of the synopses I've read of Moon's books in that genre have appealed to me. However, two other books she wrote did, and they are both fantastic: <i>The Speed of Dark</i>&nbsp;and <i>Remnant Population</i>, both of which show the great value of people who are often discarded in our society (an autistic in <i>Speed of Dark</i>&nbsp;and an elderly widow in <i>Remnant Population</i>). The book I just bought is a collection of her short stories, which I think includes some military sci-fi, so we'll see if I get hooked.<br /><br />7. Bradbury may not be deep literature, but he is able to encapsulate emotions better than any writer I know. His short story "The Fog Horn" is just the definition of loneliness. And <i>Dandelion Wine</i>&nbsp;is a perfect expression of nostalgia.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-78751190597879431832018-01-05T19:17:00.000-08:002018-01-05T19:17:06.951-08:00Happy anniversary to meAs of today I've been writing this blog for ten years. Ten freakin' years. It's older than my kids.&nbsp;<a href="https://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2007/12/statement-below-is-true.html">Here</a>'s my first post.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-58768757127657416132017-12-31T13:45:00.000-08:002017-12-31T13:45:05.571-08:00Uh, sorryOn the sidebar is the blog archive. I started out strong, but then settled down into around a hundred posts a year. In 2011 and 2012 I managed 88 posts each year. But starting in 2014, the number of annual posts dropped dramatically. Finally, this year, I got back into the swing of things. And as I entered December, I had 82 posts, with a good chance of breaking 90, and very good odds I would at least reach the 88 posts that I had in previous years. I already had a few meaty posts that were mostly written and just needed another short paragraph or so before clicking "Publish." But then, for no readily apparent reason, I kept finding other things to do. So with this post, I'm at 84 posts for the year. Not too shabby, but I had such high hopes. So, to apologize for hardly posting anything this month, I'll link you to <a href="http://www.miamiherald.com/living/liv-columns-blogs/dave-barry/article192007484.html">Dave Barry's 2017 Year in Review</a>. Merry belated Christmas and Happy New Year.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-92207445974453166212017-12-10T00:42:00.002-08:002017-12-11T12:37:26.911-08:00A few more spacey links-- Incredible. <a href="https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/12/after-37-years-voyager-has-fired-up-its-trajectory-thrusters/">They recently fired up Voyager 1's trajectory thrusters, and they worked perfectly</a>. It took over 39 hours after they first broadcast the signal to hear back from the spacecraft that it was a success because it's 19 and a half light hours away. More <a href="https://www.popsci.com/voyager-1-thrusters">here</a>.<br /><br />-- <a href="http://andyweirauthor.com/">Andy Weir</a>, who wrote <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Martian-Andy-Weir/dp/0553418025/ref=pd_sim_14_1?_encoding=UTF8&amp;pd_rd_i=0553418025&amp;pd_rd_r=GMYJH1SZ04ZSAFS8VT1C&amp;pd_rd_w=1a16A&amp;pd_rd_wg=nKEJG&amp;psc=1&amp;refRID=GMYJH1SZ04ZSAFS8VT1C">The Martian</a></i>, has another book out about a Moon base, <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Artemis-Novel-Andy-Weir/dp/0553448129?tag=popularmechanics_auto-append-20&amp;ascsubtag=[artid|10060.a.14105969[src|">Artemis</a></i>.<i>&nbsp;</i>Ima gotsta get it. <a href="http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/moon-mars/a14105969/artemis-moon-city-andy-weird/">Popular Mechanics explores the science and technology behind it</a>.<br /><br />-- What looks to be the beginning of an interesting series of articles: <a href="https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/12/apollo-risk/">"How the Apollo fire propelled NASA to the Moon"</a>.<br /><br />-- Some new discoveries make it (slightly) more likely that <a href="https://nypost.com/2017/12/07/new-discovery-boosts-possibility-of-life-on-jupiters-moon/">Jupiter's moon Europa could harbor life</a>.<br /><br /><b>Update (11 December):</b>&nbsp;Another <i>big </i>link: <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/11/trump-orders-nasa-to-send-american-astronauts-to-the-moon-mars.html?__source=twitter%7Cmain">Trump orders NASA to send American astronauts to the Moon, Mars</a>.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-46759450949022041722017-11-29T21:25:00.001-08:002017-11-29T21:44:39.429-08:00Linkfest-- <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpxN2VXPMLc">This is amazing</a>. It is the oldest piece of music known, dating from about 1400 BC. Obviously there is a lot of interpretation since it wasn't written in our musical notation, but it's still incredible. I'm linking to it instead of embedding it because you need to read the comments section.<br /><br />-- <a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2010/08/better-never-to-have-been-written.html">I've written before</a> about the book <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1280946115&amp;sr=1-1">Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming Into Existence</a></i>&nbsp;by philosopher <a href="http://www.philosophy.uct.ac.za/philosophy/staff/benatar">David Benatar</a>. I've always asked, jokingly, "Did he dedicate it to his parents?" Well, <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/culture/persons-of-interest/the-case-for-not-being-born">a new article in the New Yorker</a> reveals that <i>he actually did</i>. <a href="http://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/2017/11/david-benatar.html">Bill Vallicella comments</a> on Benatar's position, called anti-natalism, and actually points (<a href="http://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/2017/11/christian-anti-natalism.html">here</a> and <a href="http://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/2017/11/more-on-christian-anti-natalism.html">here</a>) to <i>Christian</i>&nbsp;anti-natalism: that is, that the Christian position should be to not bring any more people into existence.<br /><br />-- <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/21/world/mars-water-sand-rsl-study/index.html">"Flows of 'water' on Mars may actually be sand, new study reveals"</a>. I thought we already knew this. At least, I remember linking to a study that suggested it, but I can't find the post now, so it may have been on another blog.<br /><br />-- The inestimable <a href="http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/">Edward Feser</a> reviews the inestimable <a href="http://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/dennett/">Daniel Dennett</a>'s most recent book, the inestimable <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Bacteria-Bach-Back-Evolution-Minds/dp/0393242072/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1512018723&amp;sr=1-1&amp;keywords=from+bacteria+to+bach+and+back">From Bacteria to Bach and Back: The Evolution of Minds</a></i>. Feser's review is entitled&nbsp;<a href="http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/one-long-circular-argument/">One Long Circular Argument</a>. It begins thus:<br /><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">How do you get blood from a stone? Easy. Start by redefining “blood” to mean “a variety of stone.” Next, maintaining as straight a face as possible, dramatically expound upon some trivial respect in which stone is similar to blood. For example, describe how, when a red stone is pulverized and stirred into water, the resulting mixture looks sort of like blood. Condescendingly roll your eyes at your incredulous listener’s insistence that there are other and more important respects in which stone and blood are <i>dis</i>similar. Accuse him of obscurantism and bad faith. Finally, wax erudite about the latest research in mineralogy, insinuating that it somehow shows that to reject your thesis is to reject Science Itself.&nbsp;</blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq">Of course, no one would be fooled by so farcical a procedure. But substitute “mind” for “blood” and “matter” for “stone,” and you have the recipe for Daniel Dennett’s <i>From Bacteria to Bach and Back</i>. </blockquote><br />I haven't read the book yet, but that description sums up Dennett's whole <i>oeuvre</i>&nbsp;so well it's a little disturbing.<br /><br />-- J.R. Lucas, <a href="http://www2.units.it/etica/2003_1/13_monographica.htm">"The Gödelian Argument: Turn Over the Page"</a>,&nbsp;<i>Etica e Politica</i>&nbsp;5/1 (2003).<br /><br />-- Peter van Inwagen, <a href="http://www.andrewmbailey.com/pvi/Compatibility_Darwin_Design.pdf">"The Compatibility of Darwinism and Design"</a>, in Neil A. Manson, ed., <i>God and Design: The Teleological Argument and Modern Science</i>&nbsp;(New York: Routledge, 2003).<br /><br />-- Ted Chiang, <a href="https://subterraneanpress.com/magazine/fall_2013/the_truth_of_fact_the_truth_of_feeling_by_ted_chiang">"The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling"</a>, Subterranean Press (this last one is science-fiction, if you're wondering).Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-16081239635532037292017-11-24T17:17:00.001-08:002017-12-31T13:46:35.103-08:00InsaneA Sufi mosque in Egypt, on the Sinai Peninsula on the Mediterranean, was subject to a horrific terrorist attack. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/24/world/middleeast/mosque-attack-egypt.html">235 people are reported dead so far</a>. 235, including 15 to 25 children. My gosh, just pray for them. It's absolutely horrific. I've written before that <a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2008/01/islamic-mysticism.html">Sufism is usually considered a mystical form of Islam</a>, but many Muslims (perhaps most) consider it heretical. I presume that would be the motive here, but the larger part of me isn't interested in the motives of evil people for committing evil but on asking how we stop them.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-25960272190478757792017-11-19T06:55:00.000-08:002017-11-19T06:55:00.536-08:00Flatsy McFlathead<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/x3vcSab13Sk" width="560"></iframe><br /><br />For earlier posts on flat earth advocates, see <a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2009/12/yes-virginia-there-are-flat-earthers.html">here</a>, <a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2010/11/a-spherical-argument.html">here</a>, and <a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2017/08/blowing-up-flat-earth.html">here</a>.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-54019184159200636832017-11-18T18:40:00.000-08:002017-11-18T18:40:59.208-08:00Crud<a href="http://www.acdc.com/news?n_id=365">Malcolm Young died</a>. <a href="https://twitchy.com/jacobb-38/2017/11/18/sad-day-for-rock-and-roll-eddie-van-halen-other-musicians-react-to-the-death-of-acdcs-malcolm-young/">Here</a> are some reactions from various rockers.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-73912287142817138582017-11-16T10:14:00.001-08:002017-11-16T10:23:51.715-08:00On prayer, againSo we've had another couple of spree shootings, both by people without any ties to terror organizations, but with apparently significant mental and emotional problems. Neither shooter could legally own guns. <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/texas-church-shooting">The first was in a church in Texas</a>&nbsp;on November 5, and 26 people were killed. Naturally, many people began to pray for the survivors and the families of those who were killed. Out came the knives. Rather than link to some of the venomous statements, I'll just summarize and sanitize them: "The people in the church were <i>already praying</i>&nbsp;and it didn't stop the massacre. Why do you think <i>more</i>&nbsp;praying will have any impact. Instead of praying (read: stop praying), try <i>doing</i>&nbsp;something instead."<br /><br /><a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2017/10/please-pray.html">Now I discussed this before</a>, but one point I didn't make is that this kind of objection only works if we assume that God is some kind of mechanism, and praying to him automatically (or at least, in significant proportions) produces the desired effect. But of course, this contradicts the actual religions of the people doing the praying. God is a person, a mind, with free will. We can't <i>make</i>&nbsp;him do anything. This certainly creates an issue, which is commonly called <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evil/">the problem of evil</a>, but that doesn't account for the condemnation and malice directed towards those who pray. <a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2015/08/quote-of-week_31.html">This quote by C.S. Lewis</a> gives a good summary of why asking whether prayer <i>works</i>&nbsp;is basically a category mistake.<br /><br />But there was another issue that struck me in the aftermath of the Texas shooting. It has two parts. First, a few days beforehand, on Halloween, <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/31/us/new-york-shots-fired/index.html">there was a terrorist attack in New York</a>, where a man, claiming to be acting on behalf of ISIS, drove a truck over a bunch of pedestrians, killing eight and injuring a dozen more. The man called out the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takbir"><i>takbir</i></a>, "Allahu akbar" (God is greater, or the greatest) which is a very common phrase in Islam, stated during all kinds of things, good and bad. It has, unfortunately, become strongly associated with terrorism, as terrorists say it when committing their atrocities. The <i>takbir </i>is a prayer, although it's not a <i>petitionary</i>&nbsp;prayer -- that is, it's not specifically asking God for something, but is instead praising him. And for days afterwards, there were several opinion pieces in the media <i>defending</i>&nbsp;this prayer, trying to separate it from its association with terrorism (examples <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/02/world/americas/allahu-akbar-terrorism.html">here</a>, <a href="http://www.latimes.com/opinion/readersreact/la-ol-le-new-york-attack-allahu-akbar-20171101-story.html">here</a>, and <a href="http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/11/01/jake-tapper-cnn-defends-allahu-akbar-beautiful-after-new-york-city-terror-attack">here</a>). Fine. But this created a sharp contrast. When a Muslim prays while committing an act of horrendous evil, his prayer is defended. When Christians pray after a horrendous evil has been committed <i>against them</i>, their prayer is condemned.<br /><br />Second, a few days after the Texas shooting, on the anniversary of the Presidential election, people in several cities who were, shall we say, <i>displeased</i>&nbsp;with the results,&nbsp;<a href="https://pjmedia.com/video/watch-liberals-gather-scream-sky-ny-philly/">congregated to scream at the sky</a>. That's pretty darn close to prayers offered in the aftermath of a horrendous evil, and I suspect (though I can't prove) that most of the people who engaged in this activity were those who would defend the <i>takbir </i>and lambaste the Christians praying.<br /><br />The point, which I hope is obvious, is that there is some pretty severe hypocrisy going on by those who condemn Christians for having the audacity to pray after a horrific event. The Texas shooting was sandwiched between two events which provoked radically different responses from the same people. 1) Evil man cries out to God while committing his evil, 2) Christians cry out to God after evil man commits evil against them, 3) people congregate to cry out to God because of the political situation in the United States. If you're only condemning the second case, you're not being consistent.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-84946998083598465912017-11-11T17:39:00.000-08:002017-11-11T17:39:13.254-08:00Quote of the DayOur present condition, then, is explained by the fact that we are members of a spoiled species. I do not mean that our sufferings are a punishment for being what we cannot now help being nor that we are morally responsible for the rebellion of a remote ancestor. If, nonetheless, I call our present condition one of original Sin, and not merely one of original misfortune, that is because our actual religious experience does not allow us to regard it in any other way. Theoretically, I suppose, we might say "Yes: we behave like vermin, but then that is because we <i>are</i>&nbsp;vermin. And that, at any rate, is not our fault." But the fact that we are vermin, so far from being felt as an excuse, is a greater shame and grief to us than any of the particular acts which it leads us to commit. The situation is not nearly so hard to understand as some people make out. It arises among human beings whenever a very badly brought up boy is introduced into a decent family. They rightly remind themselves that it is "not his own fault" that he is a bully, a coward, a tale-bearer and a liar. But, however it came there, his present character is nonetheless detestable. They not only hate it, but ought to hate it. They cannot love him for what he is, they can only try to turn him into what he is not. In the meantime, though the boy is most unfortunate in having been so brought up, you cannot quite call his character a "misfortune" as if he were one thing and his character another. It is he -- he himself -- who bullies and sneaks and likes doing it. And if he begins to mend he will inevitably feel shame and guilt at what he is just beginning to cease to be.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.scriptoriumnovum.com/l.html">C.S. Lewis</a><br /><i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Problem-Pain-C-S-Lewis/dp/0060652969">The Problem of Pain</a></i>Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-59828073833034704992017-11-09T17:15:00.000-08:002017-11-09T17:15:16.327-08:00Linkfest-- <a href="http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a13266971/election-2016-behind-the-scenes/">Here's an interesting (and long) series of quotes</a> by political pundits on their reactions in the lead-up to, in the midst of, and in the aftermath of, the 2016 Presidential election. I couldn't focus on the election because I was still too overwhelmed by the flat-out miracle of the Cubs winning the World Series a few days earlier.<br /><br />-- Huh. <a href="http://truthbomb.blogspot.com/2012/01/84-confirmed-facts-in-last-16-chapters.html">84 confirmed facts in the last 16 chapters of the book of Acts</a>.<br /><br />-- <a href="http://www.historytoday.com/morgane-guinard/poisoned-will-jean-meslier">Here's an article</a> on "The Poisoned Will of Jean Meslier", an 18th century French priest, who wrote a book condemning all religion as evil, and which was only found after his death. If you want to read the poison itself, <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/files/17607/17607-h/17607-h.htm#link2H_4_0004">here ya go</a>.<br /><br />-- I know about the philosopher Sally Haslanger because I very briefly reference her husband in my book, but I don't know that much about her. <a href="https://sesardic.wordpress.com/2017/01/26/a-raging-philosopher/">This account of her career</a> frustrates me. Immensely. Right out of her doctoral studies in the mid-1980s, she got a tenure-track position at UCal Irvine. Then a year later, she got a tenure-track position at Princeton. At this point, <i>she hadn't published anything</i>. Three years later she went to a tenure-track position at U Michigan, and in 1992, was offered a tenured (not tenure-track, but tenured) position at Cornell. At this point <i>she had only published three articles</i>. I assume things were different then, but I find that account nearly miraculous. I've published several articles and a book and I'm only an adjunct. I can't even find a non-tenure-track but full-time position. But that's not what frustrates me about the account of her career.&nbsp;Again, I assume that it was easier to get a tenure-track position then, and I strongly suspect that she knew the right people and knew how to network, two areas where I am sadly lacking. No, what frustrates me is that Haslanger says she has "a deep well of rage" inside her because of how <i>shabbily</i>&nbsp;she's been treated. Her career is proof of miracles and she says she's been mistreated. I have no words.<br /><br />-- I'm sorry, but&nbsp;<a href="https://twitter.com/Gumlegs/status/927335131282661376">this</a>&nbsp;is hilarious.<br /><br />-- <a href="http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/deep-space/news/a28931/the-first-evidence-of-exoplanets-comes-from-1917/">This is cool</a>. Going over old astronomical photographic plates, scientists discovered evidence of planets orbiting other stars a hundred years ago, but the scientists of the time just didn't understand what it meant.<br /><br />-- <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2017/10/27/georgetown-university-threatens-student-group-upholding-catholic-teachings/">This . . . seems weird</a>. A student group at a Catholic university (Georgetown) is being condemned by the university for defending and upholding official Catholic teaching on the nature of sexuality. I mean, I can understand why the topic would be controversial, but they're only promoting official Catholic teaching on that topic at a Catholic institution. They're being threatened with having their status as an official student group removed.<br /><br />-- Alvin Plantinga, <a href="http://andrewmbailey.com/ap/Valid_Ontological_Argument.pdf">"A Valid Ontological Argument?"</a> <i>Philosophical Review</i> 70 (1961): 93-101.<br /><br />-- Dallas Willard, <a href="http://www.dwillard.org/articles/artview.asp?artID=18">"The Case against Quine's Case for Psychologism,"</a> in <i>Perspectives in Psychologism</i>, ed. Mark Notturno (New York: Brill, 1989), 286-295.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-35860206568398575992017-11-08T23:07:00.003-08:002017-11-08T23:07:40.195-08:00"Tu sei morta"<a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2009/12/moosik.html">A few years ago</a> I linked to a video of an aria from <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudio_Monteverdi">Monteverdi</a>'s opera <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27Orfeo"><i>L'Orfeo</i></a>. I linked to it because I couldn't embed it. Now I can, so here it is. Monteverdi was, depending on how you look at it, either a late Renaissance composer or an early Baroque composer. He died before any of the Baroque composers we all know and love were even born, but he was clearly developing music beyond Renaissance concepts. <i>L'Orfeo</i> is about <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orpheus#Death_of_Eurydice">the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice</a>, and the aria below is after Eurydice has died and Orpheus vows to go to the underworld and sing to Hades to try to convince him to let her return to the land of the living. I chose a video that translates his words, but for some reason doesn't translate the last line Orpheus sings before leaving for the underworld: "Goodbye earth, goodbye sky, and sun, goodbye." I find it heartbreaking.<br /><br /><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MIW3PRVQehw" width="560"></iframe>Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-61616944715766528982017-11-05T19:40:00.000-08:002017-11-05T19:41:40.721-08:00SF authorsFor some science-fiction authors I plan to read as many of their books and their short stories as I can. Below are those who have achieved this elevated rank. I'm sure I've forgotten some people, so I will probably add to this post in the future (I tried adding to it in the past but it didn't work out too well).<br /><br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Sheffield">Charles Sheffield</a> -- I started with <i>The Ganymede Club</i>&nbsp;and this led to other books in that sorta series, <i>Cold as Ice</i>&nbsp;and <i>Dark as Day</i>. Rustam Battacharyia is one of my heroes. I've also read <i>Mind Pool</i>, <i>Summertide</i>, and <i>Web Between the Worlds</i>.<br /><br /><a href="https://www.robert-charles-wilson.com/">Robert Charles Wilson</a> -- I first read his short story "Utriusque Cosmi" which may be the best thing I've ever read. I've since read <i>Chronoliths</i>,&nbsp;<i>Darwinia</i>, and <i>Blind Lake</i>, all of which are well-worth the reading.<br /><br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liu_Cixin">Liu Cixin</a> -- I've only read his Three Body Problem trilogy, but it's enough to hook me.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.theworksoftimpowers.com/">Tim Powers</a> -- This one's funny because a lot of his books aren't even sci-fi, they're often more like supernatural thrillers. The only thing I can compare them to is the novels of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Williams_(British_writer)">Charles Williams</a>, except Williams is much drier. Powers also packs a lot of information into his stories. <i>The Anubis Gates</i>&nbsp;would have been a 1,000-page book for anyone else, he manages it in less than 400. I've also read <i>Declare</i>&nbsp;and <i>Three Days to Never</i>.<br /><br />In addition,there are some authors who I will read many books of, but probably not all.<br /><br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredric_Brown">Fredric Brown</a> -- He should probably go in the previous list because I will read all of his sci-fi. But he also wrote mystery/detective stories and novels, and I doubt I'll read any of those. A lot of his fiction is in the short story format, <i>very</i>&nbsp;short stories. He wrote flash fiction before flash fiction was cool.<br /><br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Flynn_(writer)">Michael Flynn</a> -- This one I recently switched from the first category to this one. And it's not because I don't like his writing, it's just that, of all the sci-fi authors I've read, Flynn strikes me as honest-to-God literature. It's too deep for me. It took me months to read <i>The Wreck of the River of Stars</i>&nbsp;which is a beautiful character study, but I just couldn't take too much of it in one sitting. I've also read <i>Eifelheim</i>, <i>In the Country of the Blind</i>, the Firestar tetralogy, and his short story collection <i>The Forest of Time and Other Stories</i>. Not to mention a book he wrote with Jerry Pournelle and Larry Niven, <i>Fallen Angels</i>. Speaking of which...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.larryniven.net/">Larry Niven</a> -- I've liked Niven's stuff, but most of what I read was what he wrote with Pournelle. I'm just recently getting into his solo writings (although I read <i>Ringworld</i>&nbsp;years ago). So far, everything I've read by him is great, but not all of his books appeal to me, so I put him on this list instead of the first one.<br /><br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_A._Heinlein">Robert Heinlein</a> -- This one's easy. I love Heinlein's stuff, but starting in the 1960s his books started becoming more about evangelizing his particular political views rather than the story. <i>Stranger in a Strange Land</i>&nbsp;is a case in point. The stories in question are still outstanding, but I just dislike being preached to. I'm very much a pot calling the kettle black here, because I occasionally write sci-fi as an expression of my religious and philosophical ideas. My motive for doing so is that's just how the stories come to me, through contemplation of the religious and philosophical ideas. And, of course, that may well be how it is for others, but I still don't like it when other people do to me what I do to them -- or at least <i>would</i>&nbsp;do to them since I am unpublished and unread.<br /><br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Stanley_Robinson">Kim Stanley Robinson</a> -- I've mentioned <a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2010/02/kim-stanley-robinson.html">before</a> that I have a love/hate relationship with Robinson's writings. The only other author who has given me as much of a sense of place is <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Dickens">Charles Dickens</a>. But then a) Robinson also gets preachy, b) he can be pretty anti-Christian, and c) sometimes it seems like he's just trying to show off how much he knows. None of this is to say that I won't read his stuff, but not all of it. His novel <i>Shaman</i>&nbsp;holds no attraction to me. I first read his Mars trilogy, along with the short story companion book <i>The Martians</i>, the latter of which has the novella "Green Mars", a different story from the novel of the same name, and which is the best thing of Robinson's I've read.&nbsp;I've also read <i>Icehenge</i>, <i>Years of Rice and Salt</i>, <i>Antarctica</i>,&nbsp;<i>2312</i>, and <i>Memory of Whiteness</i>.&nbsp;When I was living in Belgium the local library only had the first of his California trilogy in English, so I got that, and to my surprise, loved it. So I got the rest of that trilogy although I haven't read it yet. I may someday check out his trilogy on global warming, but I'm avoiding it because of his preachiness.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-4317187641488960942017-10-31T13:44:00.001-07:002017-10-31T13:44:57.904-07:00Happy Reformation DayIt's 500 years to the day since <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther">Martin Luther</a> posted his <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety-five_Theses">95 theses</a>. You can read them <a href="http://www.luther.de/en/95thesen.html">here</a>. In unrelated news, for my Halloween costume, I taped a bunch of Smarties to my jeans. I'm Mr. Smartiepants.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-88258125313028070702017-10-29T22:36:00.000-07:002017-10-29T22:36:04.120-07:00Geez<a href="http://agentintellect.blogspot.com/2017/06/what-im-reading.html">I wrote a little while ago</a> that I'd primarily be reading philosophy articles rather than philosophy books, so the books on the sidebar that I'm currently reading would only consist of science-fiction and non-philosophy non-fiction. But the last week and a half has been consumed with another set of projects, so I haven't even been reading many articles. It's also had the effect of not many blogposts. Apologies.Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6672880129970799148.post-4366759801913722582017-10-23T15:28:00.000-07:002017-10-23T15:28:53.546-07:00Quote of the DayScriven speaks of <i>obligations</i>, <i>duties</i>,&nbsp;with respect to belief: in the absence of evidence, he says, atheism is <i>obligatory</i>. What sorts of principles of epistemic obligation underlie this claim? Obviously we cannot sensibly hold that for <i>any</i>&nbsp;proposition <i>A</i>, if <i>S</i>&nbsp;has no evidence for <i>A</i>, then <i>S</i>&nbsp;is rationally obliged to believe <i>~A</i>; for then if <i>S</i>&nbsp;has no evidence for <i>A</i>&nbsp;and also none for <i>~A</i>, <i>S</i>&nbsp;will be obliged to believe both <i>A</i>&nbsp;and <i>~A</i>. Some of what Scriven says suggests that it is just <i>existential</i>&nbsp;propositions with respect to which <i>S</i>&nbsp;is obliged to toe this very demanding line.<br /><div><br /></div><div>...</div><div><br /></div><div>Scriven believes that positive existential hypotheses have a very different standing from negative existential hypotheses. In the absence of evidence, he seems to think, one is obliged to believe the denial of a positive existential hypothesis, whereas of course the same does not hold for negative existential hypotheses. It is hard to see any reason for thus discriminating against positive existential hypotheses -- why should they be thought of as less credible, <i>ab initio</i>, than negative existential hypotheses? Indeed, according to Carnap and many of his followers, universal propositions have an a priori probability of zero; since the negative existential <i>~(∃x)Fx</i>&nbsp;is equivalent to a universal proposition ((x)~Fx), it too would have an a priori probability of zero, so that its positive existential denial would have an a priori probability of 1. Now it is no doubt a bit excessive to claim that the a priori credibility of positive existential propositions is 1, but is there any reason to suppose that in the absence of evidence either way, negative existentials have a stronger claim on us that positive existentials? It is at the least very hard to see what such reason might be.<br /><br />In any event Scriven's suggestion is entirely unsuccessful. Consider<br /><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">(12) There is at least one human being that was not created by God.</blockquote><br />It is a necessary truth that<br /><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">(13) If God exists, then God has created all the human beings there are.</blockquote><br />(If you think (13) is <i>not</i>&nbsp;necessary, then replace "God" in (12) and (13) by "the being who is identical with God and has created all the human beings there are.") (12) is a positive existential proposition; hence on Scriven's suggestion we ought to believe its denial unless we have evidence for it. Hence if the arguments for (12) fail, we should accept its denial. But any argument for (12), given the necessity of (13), can be transformed into an argument for the nonexistence of God -- an argument which is successful if the original argument for (11) <i>["God does not exist"]</i> is. So if the arguments for the nonexistence of God fail, then so do the arguments for (12). But, by Scriven's principle, if the arguments for (12) fail, we are rationally obliged to believe its denial, that is,<br /><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">(14) Every human being has been created by God.</blockquote><br />On this principle, therefore, if the arguments <i>against</i>&nbsp;the existence of God fail, we are rationally obliged to believe that every human being has been created by God; and if both the arguments for and the arguments against the existence of God fail, then we are obliged to believe both that God does not exist and that we have all been created by him. No doubt Scriven would view this as an unsatisfactory result.<br /><br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_Plantinga">Alvin Plantinga</a><br />"Reason and Belief in God" in<br /><i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Faith-And-Rationality-Alvin-Plantinga/dp/0268009651/">Faith and Rationality: Reason and Belief in God</a></i><br />edited by Alvin Plantinga and <a href="http://religiousstudies.yale.edu/people/nicholas-wolterstorff">Nicholas Wolterstorff</a><br /><br /><b>Jim's comments:</b>&nbsp;I have some comments on this but I'll add them later.</div>Jim S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/15538540873375357030noreply@blogger.com0